True or not ?

[DVV]

and you're saying that when someone comes into the station and tells Beck that another woman has been murdered by Jack The Ripper, Beck just says to himself, "ok, I'm gonna handle this one on my own and not grab any of the other cops that are around." is that right? because that appears to be exactly what you're suggesting.

No, that's not right.

But you are suggesting that Beck necessarily and undoubtedly went to Millers Court with Dew - which is far from proven since this "fact" would be ignored by all of us, if Dew had not written his memoirs.

I myself am merely suggesting that pages dedicated to Mary Kelly and the Ripper, written decades after the events, may well have been embellished.

[Sally]

I myself am merely suggesting that pages dedicated to Mary Kelly and the Ripper, written decades after the events, may well have been embellished.

Hi All

Is a memoir supposed to be wholly and strictly factual? Yes?

Unfortunately it never can be, whether the intention is there or not. Memory is not infallible. It is subjective. What one person remembers will differ, inevitably, from the recollections of another, even when they were in the same place, at the same time, witnessing the same events. Memory is personal.

Perhaps Dew was there, perhaps not. Perhaps he believed himself to have been present, perhaps not. Who can say? He knew enough about the scene, about the events of that day to have 'remembered' himself there even if he was never present to begin with.

And it makes a great story.

Some memoirs are clearly, positively embellished. Sometimes the intention to do so seems clear. I'm not convinced it is so here. But as to the fact of the matter - well, add to his retrospective account the differing accounts of others; and the possibility that Dew may not have been mentioned by others even if he was there - and I don't see how we can ever know for sure.

[Pontius2000]

I myself am merely suggesting that pages dedicated to Mary Kelly and the Ripper, written decades after the events, may well have been embellished.

of course it could be embellished. hell, anything can be embellished by any person. Abberline, Swanson, Beck, etc etc etc could have embellished their own part in any particular part of the case. You seem to be singling Dew out for embellishing something when there is no more reason to believe he lied than there is to say someone else lied. Bowyer made contact with Beck, which I assume that we all agree is a known fact. I also think we should all agree that Beck would've grabbed any spare hand that was available to him at the time. everything Dew said gels with this. and everything he says about looking in the window first, long before the door was broken open is plausible. and slipping on the mess on the floor (which would probably be when the bed was moved for the camera) is also plausible. so what I'm saying is, when everything matches and is perfectly believable then why do you think he was embellishing? anything can be embellishing but why do you think he did? I mean, if he's going to lie, then he may as well have come right out and claimed that he knew JtR's identity.

[Pontius2000]

Some memoirs are clearly, positively embellished. Sometimes the intention to do so seems clear. I'm not convinced it is so here. But as to the fact of the matter - well, add to his retrospective account the differing accounts of others; and the possibility that Dew may not have been mentioned by others even if he was there - and I don't see how we can ever know for sure.

what part of his account does not match with others? and the part about him not being mentioned, why would he be mentioned? he was just a PC at the time, correct?

Imagine this statement...."there were a lot of important people there. Abberline, Beck, and Anderson were all there. Several doctors showed up. There were at least a dozen PCs there. Oh yeah, and Dew was there too. He's just a PC, but he should be named above and beyond the other PCs who were there." that statement would seem kind of silly to me.

[Jon Guy]

Hello

I`ve always taken it that Dew and others followed Beck to Millers Court.
Surely, Beck would not have gone to a Ripper murder scene in Dorset St alone?
Indeed, all hands were needed on deck. The Police had to cordon off both ends of Dorset St, and according to the Daily News 10th Nov 88, Sgt Badham was on hand with a number of H-Div personnel at the ready for the Lord Mayor`s Procession:

Inspector Beck and Sergeant Betham, 31 H, who were in charge of about forty constables who had been held in readiness in anticipation of a possible Socialist disturbance attending the Lord Mayor's Show, at once proceeded to the scene of the murder, running to the house as quickly as they could.

The whole space was closely packed with detective officers, and quite a small army of plain clothes constables was located in Dorset street within an astonishingly short space of time. Dr. Phillips, the divisional surgeon of police, soon arrived,

Statements had to be taken at Millers Court, and Sgt Thick and a number of officers had to visit all the Dorset St Lodging Houses. Esther Pickles was probably the only person left back at Commercial St police station.

Jon

[Fisherman]

David:

"I have the feeling that the Kelly's part in his book may well have been more than slightly embellished."

It may, David, no doubt about it. Whichever way we look upon things, Dew´s recollections leave a good deal to ask for.

"In my opinion it's enough to question the very presence of Dew at Millers Court."

It boils down to gut feeling, I think. And my own gut feeling tells me he was there. I kind of like the point Pontius makes: it would be quite reasonable that Beck would bring somebody along with him - as a source of control and corroboration if nothing else. But even if he did, there is of course no certainty that this somebody was Walter Dew. And you are quite correct that Dew´s story can be legitimately questioned!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Pontius:

"he was just a PC at the time, correct?"

Not really - Dew was a fresh detective back then.

The best,
Fisherman

[Sally]

what part of his account does not match with others? and the part about him not being mentioned, why would he be mentioned? he was just a PC at the time, correct?

Imagine this statement...."there were a lot of important people there. Abberline, Beck, and Anderson were all there. Several doctors showed up. There were at least a dozen PCs there. Oh yeah, and Dew was there too. He's just a PC, but he should be named above and beyond the other PCs who were there." that statement would seem kind of silly to me.

Pontius

My point is that we can't know. You say 'why would he be mentioned?'. Well, quite - why would he, if he was one of a cast of several, even if not thousands? And,as you say, merely a PC.

My view - perhaps I was not specific enough - is that speculation as to whether Dew was lying in his memoirs is redundant. There is no way that I can see to prove that he was there, or not. There is no way to prove that he witnessed as he recalled, or not. The assumption that, because he is not mentioned, say, by McCarthy, Dew later lied or embellished constitutes a bit of an imaginative leap, really.

Other, perfectly plausible explanations include: Dew was there exactly as he said but wasn't mentioned for mundane reasons (which is what you are suggesting I think); Dew was there but didn't have the experiences he recounted in his memoirs because he misrembered.

We can't know, I maintain. So we must all decide for ouselves what we believe.

Personally, I think it's an odd thing to invent, unless Dew was a sensationalist character. I am therefore inclined to believe him.

[DVV]

Pontius,

so what I'm saying is, when everything matches

No it doesn't : Dew seems to imply that McCarthy kept waiting in his shop, and neither Bowyer nor McCarthy nor anyone else that I'm aware of did ever corroborate Dew's recollections and its presence on the spot.

why do you think he was embellishing?

Why or why not ? as you said, many did "embellish" their role in the Ripper story. Why not Dew ? Why not to please his publisher ?

I mean, if he's going to lie, then he may as well have come right out and claimed that he knew JtR's identity.

[Pontius2000]

No it doesn't : Dew seems to imply that McCarthy kept waiting in his shop, and neither Bowyer nor McCarthy nor anyone else that I'm aware of did ever corroborate Dew's recollections and its presence on the spot.
:

McCarthy himself said that he sent Bowyer to the police station and then he (McCarthy) locked up the shop and headed for the police station. which means he would've been at least a few minutes behind Bowyer.

[DVV]

McCarthy himself said that he sent Bowyer to the police station and then he (McCarthy) locked up the shop and headed for the police station. which means he would've been at least a few minutes behind Bowyer.

I've already accepted this part of the scenario as plausible (in a previous reply to Fish).
It remains that Dew's presence isn't corroborated. And that Dew seems to imply that McCarthy was in his shop, while we agree that he certainly went to the station shortly after Bowyer and came back to Millers Court with Beck, Bowyer........and Dew ?

You certainly understand the difference between "everything doesn't match" and "nothing matches", don't you ?

Amitiés
David

[Pontius2000]

You certainly understand the difference between "everything doesn't match" and "nothing matches", don't you ?

Amitiés
David

Yes. and there's also a difference between "something minor doesn't match" and "something major doesn't match". to me, whether or not McCarthy went to the police station, or when he got there, is fairly insignificant. Taking into account that Dew was working from a 50 year old memory, are you really going to discount his being at Miller's Court based on him remembering or not remembering if McCarthy showed up with Bowyer, after Bowyer, or not at all?

[harry]

Memory is a troublesome thing.The older one gets,the more cloudy it becomes.I was eighty three years old a couple of days ago,but I remember my first day at school,and exactly where that school was.Not all of that day,just walking across a snow covered school yard.Iremember my twenty first birthday,where i was,even how much money was in my pocket,but it was an important day.I remember a lot of things,and have forgotten a lot of things,but I remember the important things in part,and so would Dew have done.I believe he would have remembered being in Miller's Court that day.

[DVV]

Pontius,

and there's also a difference between "something minor doesn't match" and "something major doesn't match".

Certainly so. That's why I'm not flatly expressing that Dew wasn't there.

to me, whether or not McCarthy went to the police station, or when he got there, is fairly insignificant.

I beg your pardon ? The question isn't about McCarthy, for he undoubtedly went to the police station.

Taking into account that Dew was working from a 50 year old memory, are you really going to discount his being at Miller's Court based on him remembering or not remembering if McCarthy showed up with Bowyer, after Bowyer, or not at all?

Believe it or not, but I've been a bit more subtile. I'm not flatly "discounting his being at Millers Court", and in any case, certainly not "based on him remembering or not remembering".

I merely express doubts, since :

1) Neither Bowyer nor McCarthy alluded to Dew or any other Detective's presence, neither in their police statement nor in their inquest testimony.

2) Dew, in turn, has forgotten McCarthy's presence, although he seems to have known McCarthy quite well and dedicates more than one sentence to this character.

3) Embellishment is something extremely common when police officials talk about the role they played in the Ripper hunt. Not to mention the "romance" surrounding Mary Kelly (and some details about MK clearly belong to that romance in Dew's memoirs).

[Fisherman]

David:

"Neither Bowyer nor McCarthy alluded to Dew or any other Detective's presence, neither in their police statement nor in their inquest testimony."

... which may well have it´s explanation in the fact that Beck run the show. After Stride´s death, there were those who described Johnstons work as having been performed by Blackwell, as I recall things. The authority is always remembered, the foot soldiers more seldom so. But we´we already agreed on this possibility!

"Dew, in turn, has forgotten McCarthy's presence, although he seems to have known McCarthy quite well and dedicates more than one sentence to this character."

Bowyer was the man he encountered in the police station. It was Bowyer that brought the news of a horrific Ripper deed, and so if anybody of the two should be remembered at the other one´s expense, it would be him.
At what exact stage McCarty arrived, we do not know, but we do know that he would have had nothing to add to Bowyers story, and when people have nothing to add, they are often left out of the story.
Bowyer brought the news, and he knew how to direct Beck and Dew to the place of the crime, so no essential element of the story itself is lost by not mentioning McCarthy.

"Embellishment is something extremely common when police officials talk about the role they played in the Ripper hunt."

It occurrs every now and then, yes. But we cannot use that knowledge to work from some sort of general assumption that people - let alone police officers - are lying, long as we cannot prove it, or at the very least provide very clear indicators that they were not telling the truth. And in Dew´s case, there is no such thing around, although I think everybody will admit that his memoirs leave a lot to ask for. But that holds true for ALL memoirs written by ALL the top names involved.

You ask valid questions, but as it stands, I think that we have not enough on our hands to support a dismissal of the general picture Dew paints of the Miller´s Court murder.

The best,
Fisherman